Just FYI, a few brave souls like myself have already been running GCC
3.3 of CVS for a period of time, and have found quite a few solutions to
common problems with GCC 3.3 and various packages.
There's a thread in Other things Gentoo on the forums that you might
want to read, I forgot the complete link and I lack a browser right now
so go search :)
On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 16:20, Spider wrote:

> begin quote
> On 16 May 2003 13:00:53 +0100
> Dhruba Bandopadhyay <dhruba@××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
> >
> > There is an ebuild for it on bugzilla and one here and some on forums
> > too. Have you used any of these as a definitive base or is this a new
> > creation?
>
> Neither, I wanted a go at it again (I haven't been messing with gcc
> since 3.1 days) so I started from last known working 3.2.3 and went on.
>
> > Also, is there any sign of this being entered into hardmasked or
> > testig state on portage?
>
> I'm not the maintainer of gcc, so I shall leave that up to Azarah to
> decide, let him distill the different builds along with his own
> experience to see what goes.
>
> >
> > I'd be quite keen on testing it out since I have had my fair share of
> > pentium4 problems and am desperately hoping an upgrade of gcc will
> > sort them out.
>
> It may, so far it appears some old c++ code will barf though. not sure
> about glibc and kernel issues either.
>
> >
> > Pardon my ignorance but have all these patches been commented out to
> > prevent resultant problems or because they are no longer necessary?
>
> Thats up to the maintainer, since I havent taken the time to go through
> the patches each in turn and verify wether it is needed anymore I just
> commented it out to see what happened. I suspect a lot of them are no
> longer necessary, and those that are will have to be re-diffed in a new
> manner, not really an easy task.
>
> I suspect the real build won't enter portage until propolice is up in
> speed though.
>
> //Spider
>